I have played three consecutive versions of Russia’s top tier rooms, and the experience in other countries is terrible. Except for France and Italy, only playing Russia’s top tier rooms has made me feel bored
can you send it to me in PMs?
1 Like
I really hope the devs listen and buff the missile. The new SAMs were supposed to encourage other players to play top tier but if the SLM and any of the other SAM systems are just nerfed versions of their irl counterpart then… Once again top tier will remain the same.
9 Likes
If the new SAMs come out nerfed then I say its time for another carpet bomb. Top tier should be a fun BR to play at and these new SAM systems are giving players some well needed hope. Gaijin should not nerf these missiles at all.
9 Likes
IRIS-T SLM is so gimped it’s actually hilarious
obviously devs are giving it the stinger treatment on steroids to protect their precious Kh38 gameplay
9 Likes
War Thunder’s IRIS-T SLM model is critically underperforming compared to real-world performance data. Manufacturer documentation from Diehl Defence confirms the missile is capable of Mach 3+ at altitude, which requires a total impulse of at least 250+ kN·s to reach its documented 40 km range. Real-world engagements including Ukrainian intercepts of Kh-47M2 Kinzhal missiles (Mach 10 capable) at 20 km altitude clearly show the SLM operating well above Mach 3 in realistic combat conditions.
Yet in-game, the IRIS-T SLM is limited to just 148 kN·s total impulse (18.8 kN boost + 5.4 kN sustain), which is over 60% below what’s required. As a result, the missile barely reaches Mach 1 at 12 km altitude and cannot even activate a third of its real-life capability. It’s advertised in-game as being able to engage targets up to 40 km — but it simply can’t under current parameters.
How is this still unaddressed? This isn’t speculation it’s backed by manufacturer specs and verified combat performance. Can someone on the dev team please acknowledge this and explain why it’s taking so long to correct such a major discrepancy? The current model not only breaks immersion, it misrepresents one of the most capable SAM systems in service today like come on
12 Likes
Just saying. But there is no diehl source saying it has mach 3.
You are confusing that one with air launched iris-t. Thats why we got the problem
Diehl 2018 tests confirmed the missile achieves Mach 3.2 at 15 km with a boost thrust profile exceeding 200 kN" (Janes Defence, 2019). Military-grade thrust data is often classified but kinematic performance is not
3 Likes
In the current dev server，the Sweden IRIST SLS get nerfed（from 60G to 50G）. It is due to a NATO Munitions Security and Information Analysis Center Report(I have found the report source). I think we should also make it back to 60G since in the future, the eurofighter still need IRIST as a powerful fox2.
2 Likes
“i didn’t confuse with air launched iris-t because it doesn’t have 250kn thrust the air lunch on has at least 75kn”
“The IRIS-T right now is exactly what they told me it would be and if it stays like this I honestly wouldn’t mind seeing it added to air battles At this point, it’s basically just a better R-73” the only difference is the 0.25 fov irccm+shut of seeker
“and Ukraine Engagement (Oct 2023) IRIS-T SLM intercepted a Shahed drone at 17 km range while still accelerating matching” what i said and not what game performance is
2 Likes
Well to be honest, the current IRIS-T will be a good fox2 in the air battle. But when compared with the AIM9X in the dev server, it is still weaker(9x has 60G overload).While in the reality, IRIST should perform better as its strake wing enables it to achieve better aerodynamic performance.(just to argue that IRIST should be better)
sadly you cant access the information behind your link, just returns the janes site
1 Like
That link leads to nowhere. So we cantt use it.
Besides that gsjin doesnt realy accept jane as a source either way. So ko we still have nothing
1 Like
To my knowledge that has always been the case?
1 Like
Yes, but he declined material that did fall under that rule. Cause he didnt look at it
1 Like
yeah thats sad my link is not working but at least there is proof this isnt the slm performance
Until u have provided the content of that link there is no prove
Are you sure? which one are you talking about?
The Swedish source is technically an industry magazine and so a secondary source.
1 Like